At the center, logically and often physically, of every
Lojban bridi is one or more words which constitute the selbri.
A bridi expresses a relationship between things: the selbri
specifies which relationship is referred to. The difference
between:

The simplest kind of selbri is a single Lojban content word:
a brivla. There are three different varieties of brivla: those
which are built into the language (the gismu), those which are
derived from combinations of the gismu (the lujvo), and those
which are taken (usually in a modified form) from other
languages (the fu'ivla). In addition, there are a few cmavo
that can act like brivla; these are mentioned in Section 9, and discussed in full in Chapter 7.

For the purposes of this chapter, however, all brivla are
alike. For example,

1.3) ta bloti
That is-a-boat.
That is a boat.
1.4) ta brablo
that is-a-large-boat.
That is a ship.

illustrate the three types of brivla (gismu, lujvo, and fu'ivla
respectively), but in each case the selbri is composed of a
single word whose meaning can be learned independent of its
origins.

The remainder of this chapter will mostly use gismu as
example brivla, because they are short. However, it is
important to keep in mind that wherever a gismu appears, it
could be replaced by any other kind of brivla.

Beyond the single brivla, a selbri may consist of two brivla
placed together. When a selbri is built in this way from more
than one brivla, it is called a tanru, a word with no single
English equivalent. The nearest analogue to tanru in English
are combinations of two nouns such as ``lemon tree''. There is
no way to tell just by looking at the phrase ``lemon tree''
exactly what it refers to, even if you know the meanings of
``lemon'' and ``tree'' by themselves. As English-speakers, we
must simply know that it refers to ``a tree which bears lemons
as fruits''. A person who didn't know English very well might
think of it as analogous to ``brown tree'' and wonder, ``What
kind of tree is lemon-colored?''

In Lojban, tanru are also used for the same purposes as
English adjective- noun combinations like ``big boy'' and
adverb-verb combinations like ``quickly run''. This is a
consequence of Lojban not having any such categories as
``noun'', ``verb'', ``adjective'', or ``adverb''. English words
belonging to any of these categories are translated by simple
brivla in Lojban. Here are some examples of tanru:

Note that ``pelnimre'' is a lujvo for ``lemon''; it is
derived from the gismu ``pelxu'', yellow, and ``nimre'',
citrus. Note also that ``sutra'' can mean ``fast/quick'' or
``quickly'' depending on its use:

shows ``sutra'' used to translate an adjective, whereas in Example 2.3 it is translating an adverb.
(Another correct translation of Example
2.3, however, would be ``I am a quick runner''.)

There are special Lojban terms for the two components of a
tanru, derived from the place structure of the word ``tanru''.
The first component is called the ``seltau'', and the second
component is called the ``tertau''.

The most important rule for use in interpreting tanru is
that the tertau carries the primary meaning. A ``pelnimre
tricu'' is primarily a tree, and only secondarily is it
connected with lemons in some way. For this reason, an
alternative translation of Example 2.1
would be:

That is a table which goes (a wheeled table, perhaps).
That is a table owned by one who goes. That is a table used
by those who go (a sports doctor's table?). That is a table
when it goes (otherwise it is a chair?).

In each case the object referred to is a ``goer type of
table'', but the ambiguous ``type of'' relationship can mean
one of many things. A speaker who uses tanru (and pragmatically
all speakers must) takes the risk of being misunderstood. Using
tanru is convenient because they are short and expressive; the
circumlocution required to squeeze out all ambiguity can
require too much effort.

No general theory covering the meaning of all possible tanru
exists; probably no such theory can exist. However, some
regularities obviously do exist:

are parallel tanru, in the sense that the relationship between
``barda'' and ``prenu'' is the same as that between ``cmalu''
and ``prenu''. Section 14 and Section 15 contain a partial listing of some
types of tanru, with examples.

3.2) That's a little school for girls.
3.3) That's a school for little girls.

This ambiguity is quite different from the simple tanru
ambiguity described in Section 2. We
understand that ``girls' school'' means ``a school where girls
are the students'', and not ``a school where girls are the
teachers'' or ``a school which is a girl'' (!). Likewise, we
understand that ``little girl'' means ``girl who is small''.
This is an ambiguity of grouping. Is ``girls' school'' to be
taken as a unit, with ``little'' specifying the type of girls'
school? Or is ``little girl'' to be taken as a unit, specifying
the type of school? In English speech, different tones of
voice, or exaggerated speech rhythm showing the grouping, are
used to make the distinction; English writing usually leaves it
unrepresented.

Lojban makes no use of tones of voice for any purpose;
explicit words are used to do the work. The cmavo ``bo'' (which
belongs to selma'o BO) may be placed between the two brivla
which are most closely associated. Therefore, a Lojban
translation of Example 3.2 would be:

The ``bo'' is represented in the literal translation by a
hyphen because in written English a hyphen is sometimes used
for the same purpose: ``a big dog-catcher'' would be quite
different from a ``big-dog catcher'' (presumably someone who
catches only big dogs).

Analysis of Example 3.4 and Example 3.5 reveals a tanru nested within a
tanru. In Example 3.4, the main tanru has a
seltau of ``cmalu'' and a tertau of ``nixli bo ckule''; the
tertau is itself a tanru with ``nixli'' as the seltau and
``ckule'' as the tertau. In Example 3.5, on
the other hand, the seltau is ``cmalu bo nixli'' (itself a
tanru), whereas the tertau is ``ckule''. This structure of
tanru nested within tanru forms the basis for all the more
complex types of selbri that will be explained below.

The rules of Lojban do not leave this sentence ambiguous, as
the rules of English do with Example 3.1.
The choice made by the language designers is to say that Example 3.6 means the same as Example 3.5. This is true no matter what three
brivla are used: the leftmost two are always grouped together.
This rule is called the ``left-grouping rule''. Left-grouping
in seemingly ambiguous structures is quite common --- though
not universal --- in other contexts in Lojban.

Another way to express the English meaning of Example 3.4 and Example
3.5, using parentheses to mark grouping, is:

is a legal Lojban bridi that means exactly the same thing as Example 2.8, and is ambiguous in exactly the
same ways. The cmavo ``bo'' serves only to resolve grouping
ambiguity: it says nothing about the more basic ambiguity
present in all tanru.

If one element of a tanru can be another tanru, why not both
elements?

4.1) do mutce bo barda gerku bo kavbu
You are-a-(very type-of large) (dog type-of capturer).
You are a very large dog-catcher.

In Example 4.1, the selbri is a tanru
with seltau ``mutce bo barda'' and tertau ``gerku bo kavbu''.
It is worth emphasizing once again that this tanru has the same
fundamental ambiguity as all other Lojban tanru: the sense in
which the ``dog type-of capturer'' is said to be ``very type-of
large'' is not precisely specified. Presumably it is his body
which is large, but theoretically it could be one of his other
properties.

We will now justify the title of this chapter by exploring
the ramifications of the phrase ``pretty little girls'
school'', an expansion of the tanru used in Section 3 to four brivla. (Although this example
has been used in the Loglan Project almost since the beginning
--- it first appeared in Quine's book Word and
Object (1960) --- it is actually a mediocre example
because of the ambiguity of English ``pretty''; it can mean
``beautiful'', the sense intended here, or it can mean
``very''. Lojban ``melbi'' is not subject to this ambiguity: it
means only ``beautiful''.) Here are four ways to group this
phrase:

4.2) ta melbi cmalu
nixli ckule
That is-a-((pretty type-of little)
type-of girl) type-of school.
That is a school for girls who are beautifully small.
4.3) ta melbi cmalu nixli bo ckule
That is-a-(pretty type-of little) (girl type-of school).
That is a girls' school which is beautifully small.
4.4) ta melbi cmalu bo nixli
ckule
That is-a-(pretty type-of (little type-of girl))
type-of school.
That is a school for small girls who are beautiful.
4.5) ta melbi cmalu bo
nixli bo ckule
That is-a-pretty type-of (little type-of
(girl type-of school)).
That is a small school for girls which is beautiful.

Example 4.5 uses a construction which has
not been seen before: ``cmalu bo nixli bo ckule'', with two
consecutive uses of ``bo'' between brivla. The rule for
multiple ``bo'' constructions is the opposite of the rule when
no ``bo'' is present at all: the last two are grouped together.
Not surprisingly, this is called the ``right-grouping rule'',
and it is associated with every use of ``bo'' in the language.
Therefore,

means the same as Example 3.4, not Example 3.5. This rule may seem peculiar at
first, but one of its consequences is that ``bo'' is never
necessary between the first two elements of any of the complex
tanru presented so far: all of Examples
4.2 through 4.5 could have ``bo''
inserted between ``melbi'' and ``cmalu'' with no change in
meaning.

There is, in fact, a fifth grouping of ``pretty little girls'
school'' that cannot be expressed with the resources explained
so far. To handle it, we must introduce the grouping
parentheses cmavo, ``ke'' and ``ke'e'' (belonging to selma'o KE
and KEhE respectively). Any portion of a selbri sandwiched
between these two cmavo is taken to be a single tanru
component, independently of what is adjacent to it. Thus, Example 4.2 can be rewritten in any of the
following ways:

Even more versions could be created simply by placing any
number of ``ke'' cmavo at the beginning of the selbri, and a
like number of ``ke'e'' cmavo at its end. Obviously, all of
these are a waste of breath once the left-grouping rule has
been grasped. However, the following is equivalent to Example 4.4 and may be easier to
understand:

much better. After all, the straightforward understanding of
the English phrase is that the dog is big as compared with
other dogs, not merely as compared with other red dogs. In
fact, the bigness and redness are independent properties of the
dog, and only obscure rules of English adjective ordering
prevent us from saying ``red big dog''.

The Lojban approach to this problem is to introduce the
cmavo ``je'', which is one of the many equivalents of English
``and''. A big red dog is one that is both big and red, and we
can say:

is equally satisfactory and means the same thing. As these
examples indicate, joining two brivla with ``je'' makes them a
unit for tanru purposes. However, explicit grouping with ``bo''
or ``ke ... ke'e'' associates brivla more closely than ``je''
does:

definitely refers to something which is both blue and is a
house, and not to any of the other possible interpretations of
simple ``blanu zdani''. Furthermore, ``blanu zdani'' refers to
something which is blue in the way that houses are blue;
``blanu je zdani'' has no such implication --- the blueness of
a ``blanu je zdani'' is independent of its houseness.

With the addition of ``je'', many more versions of ``pretty
little girls' school'' are made possible: see Section 16 for a complete list.

A subtle point in the semantics of tanru like Example 6.3 needs special elucidation. There
are at least two possible interpretations of:

whereas the interpretation specified by Example 6.10 does not. This is a kind of
semantic ambiguity for which Lojban does not compel a firm
resolution. The way in which the school is said to be of type
``beautiful and girl'' may entail that it is separately a
beautiful school and a girls' school; but the alternative
interpretation, that the members of the school are beautiful
and girls, is also possible. Still another interpretation is:

so while the logical connectives help to resolve the meaning of
tanru, they by no means compel a single meaning in and of
themselves.

In general, logical connectives within tanru cannot undergo
the formal manipulations that are possible with the related
logical connectives that exist outside tanru; see Chapter 14 for further details.

The logical connective ``je'' is only one of the fourteen
logical connectives that Lojban provides. Here are a few
examples of some of the others:

6.13) le bajra cu jinga ja te jinga
the runner(s) is/are winner(s) or loser(s).
6.14) blanu naja lenku skapi
(blue only-if cold) skin
skin which is blue only if it is cold
6.15) xamgu jo cortu nuntavla
(good if-and-only-if short) speech
speech which is good if (and only if) it is short
6.16) vajni ju pluka nuntavla
(important whether-or-not pleasing) event-of-talking
speech which is important, whether or not it is pleasing

which illustrates a new grammatical feature: the use of both
``ja'' and ``bo'' between tanru components. The two cmavo
combine to form a compound whose meaning is that of ``ja'' but
which groups more closely; ``jabo'' is to ``ja'' as plain
``bo'' is to no cmavo at all. However, both ``ja'' and ``jabo''
group less closely than ``bo'' does:

In addition to the logical connectives, there are also a
variety of non-logical connectives, grammatically equivalent to
the logical ones. The only one with a well-understood meaning
in tanru contexts is ``joi'', which is the kind of ``and'' that
denotes a mixture:

is probably self-contradictory, seeming to claim that the ball
is independently both blu and red at the same time, although
some sensible interpretation may exist.

Finally, just as English ``and'' has the variant form ``both
... and'', so ``je'' between tanru components has the variant
form ``gu'e ... gi'', where ``gu'e'' is placed before the
components and ``gi'' between them:

is equivalent in meaning to Example 6.3.
For each logical connective related to ``je'', there is a
corresponding connective related to ``gu'e ... gi'' in a
systematic way.

The portion of a ``gu'e ... gi'' construction before the
``gi'' is a full selbri, and may use any of the selbri
resources including ``je'' logical connections. After the
``gi'', logical connections are taken to be wider in scope than
the ``gu'e ... gi'', which has in effect the same scope as
``bo'':

6.23) gu'e barda je xunre gi gerku ja mlatu
(both (big and red) and dog) or cat
something which is either big, red, and a dog,
or else a cat

leaves ``mlatu'' outside the ``gu'e--gi'' construction. The
scope of the ``gi'' arm extends only to a single brivla or to
two or more brivla connected with ``bo'' or ``ke--ke'e''.

The question of the place structures of selbri has been
glossed over so far. This chapter does not attempt to treat
place structure issues in detail; they are discussed in Chapter 9. One grammatical structure
related to places belongs here, however. In simple sentences
such as Example 1.1, the place structure of
the selbri is simply the defined place structure of the gismu
``mamta''. What about more complex selbri?

For tanru, the place structure rule is simple: the place
structure of a tanru is always the place structure of its
tertau. Thus, the place structure of ``blanu zdani'' is that of
``zdani'': the x1 place is a house or nest, and the x2 place is
its occupants.

What about the places of ``blanu''? Is there any way to get
them into the act? In fact, ``blanu'' has only one place, and
this is merged, as it were, with the x1 place of ``zdani''. It
is whatever is in the x1 place that is being characterized as
blue-for-a-house. But if we replace ``blanu'' with ``xamgu'',
we get:

7.1) ti xamgu zdani
this is-a-good house.
This is a good (for someone, by some standard) house.

Since ``xamgu'' has three places (x1, the good thing; x2,
the person for whom it is good; and x3, the standard of
goodness), Example 7.1 necessarily omits
information about the last two: there is no room for them. Room
can be made, however!

7.2) ti xamgu be do bei mi [be'o] zdani
this is-a-good ( for you by-standard me ) house.
This is a house that is good for you by my standards.

Here, the gismu ``xamgu'' has been followed by the cmavo ``be''
(of selma'o BE), which signals that one or more sumti follows.
These sumti are not part of the overall bridi place structure,
but fill the places of the brivla they are attached to,
starting with x2. If there is more than one sumti, they are
separated by the cmavo ``bei'' (of selma'o BEI), and the list
of sumti is terminated by the elidable terminator ``be'o'' (of
selma'o BEhO).

Grammatically, a brivla with sumti linked to it in this
fashion plays the same role in tanru as a simple brivla. To
illustrate, here is a fully fleshed-out version of Example 3.4, with all places filled in:

7.3) ti cmalu be le ka canlu
bei lo'e ckule be'o
nixli be li mu
bei lo merko be'o bo
ckule la bryklyn. loi pemci
le mela nu,IORK. prenu
le jecta
This is a small (in-dimension the property-of volume
by-standard the-typical school)
(girl (of-years the-number five
by-standard some American-thing)
school) in-Brooklyn with-subject poems
for-audience New-York persons
with-operator the state.
This is a school, small in volume compared to the
typical school, pertaining to five-year-old
girls (by American standards), in Brooklyn,
teaching poetry to the New York community
and operated by the state.

Here the three places of ``cmalu'', the three of ``nixli'',
and the four of ``ckule'' are fully specified. Since the places
of ``ckule'' are the places of the bridi as a whole, it was not
necessary to link the sumti which follow ``ckule''. It would
have been legal to do so, however:

No matter how complex a tanru gets, the last brivla always
dictates the place structure: the place structure of

7.6) melbi je cmalu nixli bo ckule
a (pretty and little) (girl school)
a school for girls which is both beautiful and small

is simply that of ``ckule''. (The sole exception to this rule
is discussed in Section 8.)

It is possible to precede linked sumti by the place
structure ordering tags ``fe'', ``fi'', ``fo'', and ``fu'' (of
selma'o FA, discussed further in Chapter
9), which serve to explicitly specify the x2, x3, x4, and
x5 places respectively. Normally, the place following the
``be'' is the x2 place and the other places follow in order. If
it seems convenient to change the order, however, it can be
accomplished as follows:

7.7) ti xamgu be fi mi bei fe do [be'o] zdani
this is-a-good ( by-standard me for you ) house

which is equivalent in meaning to Example
7.2. Note that the order of ``be'', ``bei'', and ``be'o''
does not change; only the inserted ``fi'' tells us that ``mi''
is the x3 place (and correspondingly, the inserted ``fe'' tells
us that ``do'' is the x2 place). Changing the order of sumti is
often done to match the order of another language, or for
emphasis or rhythm.

Of course, using FA cmavo makes it easy to specify one place
while omitting a previous place:

7.8) ti xamgu be fi mi [be'o] zdani
this is-a-good (by-standard me) house
This is a good house by my standards.

Similarly, sumti labeled by modal or tense tags can be inserted
into strings of linked sumti just as they can into bridi:

7.9) ta blanu be ga'a mi [be'o] zdani
That is-a-blue ( to-observer me ) house.
That is a blue, as I see it, house.

The terminator ``be'o'' is almost always elidable: however,
if the selbri belongs to a description, then a relative clause
following it will attach to the last linked sumti unless
``be'o'' is used, in which case it will attach to the outer
description:

In other cases, however, ``be'o'' cannot be elided if ``ku''
has also been elided:

7.13) le xamgu be le ctuca [ku] be'o zdani
the good (for the teacher ) house

requires either ``ku'' or ``be'o'', and since there is only one
occurrence of ``be'', the ``be'o'' must match it, whereas it
may be confusing which occurrence of ``le'' the ``ku''
terminates (in fact the second one is correct).

The standard order of Lojban tanru, whereby the modifier
precedes what it modifies, is very natural to English-speakers:
we talk of ``blue houses'', not of ``houses blue''. In other
languages, however, such matters are differently arranged, and
Lojban supports this reverse order (tertau before seltau) by
inserting the particle ``co''. Example 8.1
and Example 8.2 mean exactly the same
thing:

8.1) ta blanu zdani
That is-a-blue type-of-house.
That is a blue house.
8.2) ta zdani co blanu
That is-a-house of-type blue.
That is a blue house.

This change is called ``tanru inversion''. In tanru inversion,
the element before ``co'' (``zdani'' in Example
8.2) is the tertau, and the element following ``co''
(``blanu'') in Example 8.2) is the seltau.

The meaning, and more specifically, the place structure, of
a tanru is not affected by inversion: the place structure of
``zdani co blanu'' is still that of ``zdani''. However, the
existence of inversion in a selbri has a very special effect on
any sumti which follow that selbri. Instead of being
interpreted as filling places of the selbri, they actually fill
the places (starting with x2) of the seltau. In Section 7, we saw how to fill interior places
with ``be ... bei ... be'o'', and in fact Example 8.3 and Example
8.4 have the same meaning:

8.3) mi klama be le zarci bei le zdani be'o
troci
I am-a-(goer to the market from the house)
type-of trier.
I try to go to the market from the house.
8.4) mi troci co klama le zarci le zdani
I am-a-trier
of-type (goer to-the market from-the house).
I try to go to the market from the house.

Example 8.4 is a less deeply nested
construction, requiring fewer cmavo. As a result it is probably
easier to understand.

Note that in Lojban ``trying to go'' is expressed using
``troci'' as the tertau. The reason is that ``trying to go'' is
a ``going type of trying'', not a ``trying type of going''. The
trying is more fundamental than the going --- if the attempt
fails, we may not have a going at all.

Any sumti which precede a selbri with an inverted tanru fill
the places of the selbri (i.e., the places of the tertau) in
the ordinary way. In Example 8.4, ``mi''
fills the x1 place of ``troci co klama'', which is the x1 place
of ``troci''. The other places of the selbri remain unfilled.
The trailing sumti ``le zarci'' and ``le zdani'' do not occupy
selbri places, despite appearances.

As a result, the regular mechanisms (involving selma'o VOhA
and GOhI, explained in Chapter 7) for
referring to individual sumti of a bridi cannot refer to any of
the trailing places of Example 8.4, because
they are not really ``sumti of the bridi'' at all.

When inverting a more complex tanru, it is possible to
invert it only at the most general modifier-modified pair. The
only possible inversion of Example 3.4, for
instance, is:

Note that the ``bo'' of Example 3.4 is
optional in Example 8.5, because ``co''
groups more loosely than any other cmavo used in tanru,
including none at all. Not even ``ke ... ke'e'' parentheses can
encompass a ``co'':

In Example 8.6, the ``ke'e'' is
automatically inserted before the ``co'' rather than at its
usual place at the end of the selbri. As a result, there is a
simple and mechanical rule for removing ``co'' from any selbri:
change ``A co B'' to ``ke B ke'e A''. (At the same time, any
sumti following the selbri must be transformed into ``be ...
bei ... be'o'' form and attached following B.) Therefore,

Multiple ``co'' cmavo can appear within a selbri, indicating
multiple inversions: a right-grouping rule is employed, as for
``bo''. The above rule can be applied to interpret such selbri,
but all ``co'' cmavo must be removed simultaneously:

cannot be filled by placing sumti after the selbri, because any
sumti in that position fill the places of ``sutra'', the
seltau. However, the tertau places (which means in effect the
selbri places) can be filled with ``be'':

So far we have only discussed brivla and tanru built up from
brivla as possible selbri. In fact, there are a few other
constructions in Lojban which are grammatically equivalent to
brivla: they can be used either directly as selbri, or as
components in tanru. Some of these types of simple selbri are
discussed at length in Chapter 7, Chapter 11, and Chapter 18; but for completeness these
types are mentioned here with a brief explanation and an
example of their use in selbri.

The cmavo of selma'o GOhA (with one exception) serve as
pro-bridi, providing a reference to the content of other bridi;
none of them has a fixed meaning. The most commonly used member
of GOhA is probably ``go'i'', which amounts to a repetition of
the previous bridi, or part of it. If I say:

because the whole bridi of Example 9.1 has
been packaged up into the single word ``go'i'' and inserted
into Example 9.2.

The exceptional member of GOhA is ``du'', which represents
the relation of identity. Its place structure is:

x1 is identical with x2, x3, ...

for as many places as are given. More information on selma'o
GOhA is available in Chapter 7.

Lojban mathematical expressions (mekso) can be incorporated
into selbri in two different ways. Mathematical operators such
as ``su'i'', meaning ``plus'', can be transformed into selbri
by prefixing them with ``nu'a'' (of selma'o NUhA). The
resulting place structure is:

x1 is the result of applying (the operator) to arguments
x2, x3, etc.

for as many arguments as are required. (The result goes in the
x1 place because the number of following places may be
indefinite.) For example:

Finally, an important type of simple selbri which is not a
brivla is the abstraction. Grammatically, abstractions are
simple: a cmavo of selma'o NU, followed by a bridi, followed by
the elidable terminator ``kei'' of selma'o KEI. Semantically,
abstractions are an extremely subtle and powerful feature of
Lojban whose full ramifications are documented in Chapter 11. A few examples:

A sumti can be made into a simple selbri by preceding it with
``me'' (of selma'o ME) and following it with the elidable
terminator ``me'u'' (of selma'o MEhU). This makes a selbri with
the place structure

x1 is one of the referents of ``[the sumti]''

which is true of the thing, or things, that are the referents
of the sumti, and not of anything else. For example, consider
the sumti

The elidable terminator ``me'u'' can usually be omitted. It is
absolutely required only if the ``me'' selbri is being used in
an indefinite description (a type of sumti explained in Chapter 6), and if the indefinite
description is followed by a relative clause (explained in Chapter 8) or a sumti logical connective
(explained in Chapter 14). Without a
``me'u'', the relative clause or logical connective would
appear to belong to the sumti embedded in the ``me''
expression. Here is a contrasting pair of sentences:

In Example 10.8 the ``me'' selbri
covers the three kings plus John, and the indefinite
description picks out two of them that are said to be white: we
cannot say which two. In Example 10.9,
though, the ``me'' selbri covers only the three kings: two of
them are said to be white, and so is John.

Finally, here is another example requiring ``me'u'':

10.10) ta me la'e le se cusku be do me'u cukta
That is-a-(what-you-said) type of book.
That is the kind of book you were talking about.

There are other sentences where either ``me'u'' or some
other elidable terminator must be expressed:

Conversion is the process of changing a selbri so that its
places appear in a different order. This is not the same as
labeling the sumti with the cmavo of FA, as mentioned in Section 7, and then rearranging the order in
which the sumti are spoken or written. Conversion transforms
the selbri into a distinct, though closely related, selbri with
renumbered places.

In Lojban, conversion is accomplished by placing a cmavo of
selma'o SE before the selbri:

11.2) do se prami mi
You [swap x1 and x2] love me.
You are loved by me.

Conversion is fully explained in Chapter 9. For the purposes of this
chapter, the important point about conversion is that it
applies only to the following simple selbri. When trying to
convert a tanru, therefore, it is necessary to be careful!
Consider Example 11.3:

But the tanru in Example 11.6 may or
may not have the same meaning as that in Example 11.3; in particular, because
``cadzu'' is not converted, there is a suggestion that although
Alice is the goer, the market is the walker. With a different
sumti as x1, this seemingly odd interpretation might make
considerable sense:

There is an alternative type of conversion, using the cmavo
``jai'' of selma'o JAI optionally followed by a modal or tense
construction. Grammatically, such a combination behaves exactly
like conversion using SE. More details can be found in Chapter 9.

Negation is too large and complex a topic to explain fully
in this chapter; see Chapter 15. In
brief, there are two main types of negation in Lojban. This
section is concerned with so-called ``scalar negation'', which
is used to state that a true relation between the sumti is
something other than what the selbri specifies. Scalar negation
is expressed by cmavo of selma'o NAhE:

meaning that Alice does go there in some way (``klama'' is not
negated), but by a means other than that of walking. Example 12.1 negates both ``cadzu'' and
``klama'', suggesting that Alice's relation to the market is
something different from walkingly-going; it might be walking
without going, or going without walking, or neither.

Of course, any of the simple selbri types explained in Section 9 may be used in place of brivla in any
of these examples:

Since only ``pamoi'' is negated, an appropriate inference is
that he is some other kind of speaker.

Here is an assortment of more complex examples showing the
interaction of scalar negation with ``bo'' grouping, ``ke'' and
``ke'e'' grouping, logical connection, and sumti linked with
``be'' and ``bei'':

12.4) mi na'e sutra cadzu be fi le birka be'o
klama le zarci
I ((non-quickly) ( walking using the arms))
go-to the market.
I go to the market, walking using my arms
other than quickly.

12.5) mi na'e ke sutra cadzu be fi le birka [be'o] ke'e
klama le zarci
I non- ( quickly (walking using the arms) )
go-to the market.
I go to the market, other than by walking
quickly on my arms.

Now consider Example 12.6 and Example 12.7, which are equivalent in
meaning, but use ``ke'' grouping and ``bo'' grouping
respectively:

12.6) mi sutra cadzu be fi le birka be'o je masno
klama le zarci
I (quickly -- (walking using the arms) and slowly)
go-to the market.
I go to the market, both quickly walking
using my arms and slowly.
12.7) mi ke sutra cadzu be fi le birka [be'o] ke'e
je masno klama le zarci
I ((quickly (walking using the arms))
and slowly) go-to the market.
I go to the market, both quickly walking
using my arms and slowly.

However, if we place a ``na'e'' at the beginning of the
selbri in both Example 12.6 and Example 12.7, we get different results:

12.8) mi na'e sutra cadzu be fi le birka be'o
je masno klama le zarci
I ((non- quickly) -- (walking using the arms)
and slowly) go-to the market.
I go to the market, both walking using my arms
other than quickly, and also slowly.
12.9) mi na'e ke sutra cadzu be fi le birka [be'o] ke'e
je masno klama le zarci
I (non-(quickly (walking using the arms))
and slowly) go-to the market.
I go to the market, both other than quickly
walking using my arms, and also slowly.

The difference arises because the ``na'e'' in Example 12.9 negates the whole construction
from ``ke'' to ``ke'e'', whereas in Example
12.8 it negates ``sutra'' alone.

Beware of omitting terminators in these complex examples! If
the explicit ``ke'e'' is left out in Example
12.9, it is transformed into:

12.10) mi na'e ke sutra cadzu be fi le birka be'o
je masno klama [ke'e] le zarci
I non-(quickly ((walking using the arms))
and slowly) go-to) the market.
I do something other than quickly both
going to the market walking using my arms
and slowly going to the market.

And if both ``ke'e'' and ``be'o'' are omitted, the results
are even sillier:

12.11) mi na'e ke sutra cadzu be fi le birka
je masno klama [be'o] [ke'e] le zarci
I non-(quickly walk on my (arm-type
and slow) goers) on the market.
I do something other than quickly walking using the
goers, both arm-type and slow, relative-to the market.

In Example 12.11, everything after
``be'' is a linked sumti, so the place structure is that of
``cadzu'', whose x2 place is the surface walked upon. It is
less than clear what an ``arm-type goer'' might be.
Furthermore, since the x3 place has been occupied by the linked
sumti, the ``le zarci'' following the selbri falls into the
nonexistent x4 place of ``cadzu''. As a result, the whole
example, though grammatical, is complete nonsense. (The
bracketed Lojban words appear where a fluent Lojbanist would
understand them to be implied.)

Finally, it is also possible to place ``na'e'' before a
``gu'e ... gi'' logically connected tanru construction. The
meaning of this usage has not yet been firmly established.

A bridi can have cmavo associated with it which specify the
time, place, or mode of action. For example, in

13.1) mi pu klama le zarci
I [past] go to-the market.
I went to the market.

the cmavo ``pu'' specifies that the action of the speaker going
to the market takes place in the past. Tenses are explained in
full detail in Chapter 10. Tense is
semantically a property of the entire bridi; however, the usual
syntax for tenses attaches them at the front of the selbri, as
in Example 13.1. There are alternative
ways of expressing tense information as well. Modals, which are
explained in Chapter 9, behave in the
same way as tenses.

Similarly, a bridi may have the particle ``na'' (of selma'o
NA) attached to the beginning of the selbri to negate the
bridi. A negated bridi expresses what is false without saying
anything about what is true. Do not confuse this usage with the
scalar negation of Section 12. For
example:

13.2) la djonz. na pamoi cusku
Jones (Not!) is-the-first speaker
It is not true that Jones is the first speaker.
Jones isn't the first speaker.

Jones may be the second speaker, or not a speaker at all; Example 13.2 doesn't say. There are other
ways of expressing bridi negation as well; the topic is
explained fully in Chapter 15.

Various combinations of tense and bridi negation cmavo are
permitted. If both are expressed, either order is permissible
with no change in meaning:

13.3) mi na pu klama le zarci
mi pu na klama le zarci
It is false that I went to the market.
I didn't go to the market.

It is also possible to have more than one ``na'', in which case
pairs of ``na'' cmavo cancel out:

13.4) mi na na klama le zarci
It is false that it is false that I go to the market.
I go to the market.

It is even possible, though somewhat pointless, to have
multiple ``na'' cmavo and tense cmavo mixed together, subject
to the limitation that two adjacent tense cmavo will be
understood as a compound tense, and must fit the grammar of
tenses as explained in Chapter 10.

13.5) mi na pu na ca klama le zarci
I [not] [past]
[not] [present] go to-the market
It is not the case that in the past it was not
the case that in the present I went
to the market.
I didn't not go to the market.
I went to the market.

Tense, modal, and negation cmavo can appear only at the
beginning of the selbri. They cannot be embedded within it.

This section and Section 15 contain some
example tanru classified into groups based on the type of
relationship between the modifying seltau and the modified
tertau. All the examples are paralleled by compounds actually
observed in various natural languages. In the tables which
follow, each group is preceded by a brief explanation of the
relationship. The tables themselves contain a tanru, a literal
gloss, an indication of the languages which exhibit a compound
analogous to this tanru, and (for those tanru with no English
parallel) a translation.

Here are the 3-letter abbreviations used for the various
languages (it is presumed to be obvious whether a compound is
found in English or not, so English is not explicitly
noted):

Any lujvo or fu'ivla used in a group are glossed at the end
of that group.

The tanru discussed in this section are asymmetrical tanru;
that is, ones in which the order of the terms is fundamental to
the meaning of the tanru. For example, ``junla dadylsi'', or
``clock pendulum'', is the kind of pendulum used in a clock,
whereas ``dadysli junla'', or ``pendulum clock'', is the kind
of clock that employs a pendulum. Most tanru are asymmetrical
in this sense. Symmetrical tanru are discussed in Section 15.

The tertau represents an action, and the seltau then
represents the object of that action:

Conversely: the tertau is an element, and the seltau represents
a set in which that element is contained. Implicitly, the
meaning of the tertau is restricted from its usual general
meaning to the specific meaning appropriate for elements in the
given set. Note the opposition between ``zdani linji'' in the
previous group, and ``linji zdani'' in this one, which shows
why this kind of tanru is called ``asymmetrical''.

carvi dirgo

raindrop (Tur,Kor,Hun,Udm,Aba) linji zdani row house

The seltau specifies an object and the tertau a component or
detail of that object; the tanru as a whole refers to the
detail, specifying that it is a detail of that whole and not
some other.

Conversely: the seltau specifies a characteristic or important
detail of the object described by the tertau; objects described
by the tanru as a whole are differentiated from other similar
objects by this detail.

The tertau specifies a general class of object (a genus), and
the seltau specifies a sub-class of that class (a species):

ckunu tricu

pine tree (Hun,Tur,Hop)

The tertau specifies an object of possession, and the seltau
may specify the possessor (the possession may be intrinsic or
otherwise). In English, these compounds have an explicit
possessive element in them: ``lion's mane'', ``child's foot'',
``noble's cow''.

The tertau specifies an object, and the seltau specifies the
material from which the object is made. This case is especially
interesting, because the referent of the tertau may normally be
made from just one kind of material, which is then overridden
in the tanru.

The tertau specifies a typical object used to measure a
quantity and the seltau specifies something measured. The tanru
as a whole refers to a given quantity of the thing being
measured. English does not have compounds of this form, as a
rule.

The tertau specifies an object with certain implicit
properties, and the seltau overrides one of those implicit
properties:

kensa bloti

spaceship bakni verba cattle child (Ewe = calf)

The seltau specifies a whole, and the tertau specifies a part
which normally is associated with a different whole. The tanru
then refers to a part of the seltau which stands in the same
relationship to the whole seltau as the tertau stands to its
typical whole.

The tertau specifies the producer of a certain product, and the
seltau specifies the product. In this way, the tanru as a whole
distinguishes its referents from other referents of the tertau
which do not produce the product.

silka curnu

silkworm (Tur,Hun,Aba)

The tertau specifies an object, and the seltau specifies
another object which has a characteristic property. The tanru
as a whole refers to those referents of the tertau which
possess the property.

Finally, some tanru which don't fall into any of the above
categories.

ladru denci

milk tooth (Tur,Hun,Udm,Qab) kanla denci eye tooth

It is clear that ``tooth'' is being specified, and that
``milk'' and ``eye'' act as modifiers. However, the
relationship between ``ladru'' and ``denci'' is something like
``tooth which one has when one is drinking milk from one's
mother'', a relationship certainly present nowhere except in
this particular concept. As for ``kanla denci'', the
relationship is not only not present on the surface, it is
hardly possible to formulate it at all.

This section deals with symmetrical tanru, where order is
not important. Many of these tanru can be expressed with a
logical or non-logical connective between the components.

The tanru may refer to things which are correctly specified
by both tanru components. Some of these instances may also be
seen as asymmetrical tanru where the seltau specifies a
material. The connective ``je'' is appropriate:

The following examples show every possible grouping
arrangement of ``melbi cmalu nixli ckule'' using ``bo'' or ``ke
... ke'e'' for grouping and ``je'' or ``jebo'' for logical
connection. Most of these are definitely not plausible
interpretations of the English phrase ``pretty little girls'
school'', especially those which describe something which is
both a girl and a school.

Examples 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, and 5.6 are repeated here as
Examples 16.1, 16.9, 16.17, 16.25, and 16.33 respectively. The
seven examples following each of these share the same grouping
pattern, but differ in the presence or absence of ``je'' at
each possible site. Some of the examples have more than one
Lojban version. In that case, they differ only in grouping
mechanism, and are always equivalent in meaning.

The logical connective ``je'' is associative: that is, ``A
and (B and C)'' is the same as ``(A and B) and C''. Therefore,
some of the examples have the same meaning as others. In
particular, 16.8, 16.16, 16.24, 16.32, and 16.40 all have the
same meaning because all four brivla are logically connected
and the grouping is simply irrelevant. Other equivalent forms
are noted in the examples themselves. However, if ``je'' were
replaced by ``naja'' or ``jo'' or most of the other logical
connectives, the meanings would become distinct.

It must be emphasized that, because of the ambiguity of all
tanru, the English translations are by no means definitive ---
they represent only one possible interpretation of the
corresponding Lojban sentence.

16.1) melbi cmalu nixli ckule
((pretty type-of little) type-of girl) type-of school
school for girls who are beautifully small
16.2) melbi je cmalu nixli ckule
((pretty and little) type-of girl) type-of school
school for girls who are beautiful and small
16.3) melbi bo cmalu je nixli ckule
((pretty type-of little) and girl) type-of school
school for girls and for beautifully small things
16.4) ke melbi cmalu nixli ke'e je ckule
((pretty type-of little) type-of girl) and school
thing which is a school and a beautifully small girl
16.5) melbi je cmalu je nixli ckule
((pretty and little) and girl) type-of school
school for things which are beautiful, small, and girls
Note: same as 16.21
16.6) melbi bo cmalu je nixli je ckule
((pretty type-of little) and girl) and school
thing which is beautifully small, a school, and a girl
Note: same as 16.14
16.7) ke melbi je cmalu nixli ke'e je ckule
((pretty and little) type-of girl) and school
thing which is a school and a girl who is both
beautiful and small
16.8) melbi je cmalu je nixli je ckule
((pretty and little) and girl) and school
thing which is beautiful, small, a girl, and a school
16.9) melbi cmalu nixli bo ckule
(pretty type-of little) type-of (girl type-of school)
girls' school which is beautifully small
16.10) melbi je cmalu nixli bo ckule
(pretty and little) type-of (girl type-of school)
girls' school which is beautiful and small
16.11) melbi cmalu nixli je ckule
(pretty type-of little) type-of (girl and school)
something which is a girl and a school
which is beautifully small
16.12) melbi bo cmalu je nixli bo ckule
(pretty type-of little) and (girl type-of school)
something which is beautifully small and a girls' school
16.13) melbi je cmalu nixli je ckule
(pretty and little) type-of (girl and school)
a pretty and little type of thing which is
both a girl and a school
16.14) melbi bo cmalu je nixli jebo ckule
(pretty type-of little) and (girl and school)
thing which is beautifully small, a school, and a girl
Note: same as 16.6
16.15) melbi jebo cmalu je nixli bo ckule
(pretty and little) and (girl type-of school)
thing which is beautiful and small and a girl's school
Note: same as 16.30
16.16) melbi jebo cmalu je nixli jebo ckule
(pretty and little) and (girl and school)
thing which is beautiful, small, a girl, and a school
16.17) melbi cmalu bo nixli ckule
(pretty type-of (little type-of girl)) type-of school
school for beautiful girls who are small
16.18) melbi cmalu je nixli ckule
(pretty type-of (little and girl)) type-of school
school for beautiful things which are small and are girls
16.19) melbi je cmalu bo nixli ckule
(pretty and (little type-of girl)) type-of school
school for things which are beautiful and are small girls
16.20) ke melbi cmalu bo nixli ke'e je ckule
melbi bo cmalu bo nixli je ckule
(pretty type-of (little type-of girl)) and school
thing which is a school and a small girl who is beautiful
16.21) melbi je cmalu jebo nixli ckule
(pretty and (little and girl)) type-of school
school for things which are beautiful, small, and girls
Note: same as 16.5
16.22) melbi je cmalu bo nixli je ckule
(pretty and (little type-of girl)) and school
thing which is beautiful, a small girl, and a school
Note: same as 16.38
16.23) ke melbi cmalu je nixli ke'e je ckule
(pretty type-of (little and girl)) and school
thing which is beautifully small, a beautiful girl,
and a school
16.24) melbi je cmalu jebo nixli je ckule
(pretty and (little and girl)) and school
thing which is beautiful, small, a girl, and a school
16.25) melbi cmalu bo nixli bo ckule
melbi ke cmalu ke nixli ckule [ke'e] [ke'e]
pretty type-of (little type-of (girl type-of school))
small school for girls which is beautiful
16.26) melbi ke cmalu nixli je ckule [ke'e]
pretty type-of (little type-of (girl and school))
small thing, both a girl and a school, which is beautiful
16.27) melbi cmalu je nixli bo ckule
pretty type-of (little and (girl type-of school))
thing which is beautifully small
and a girls' school that is beautiful
16.28) melbi je cmalu bo nixli bo ckule
melbi je ke cmalu nixli bo ckule [ke'e]
melbi je ke cmalu ke nixli ckule [ke'e] [ke'e]
pretty and (little type-of (girl type-of school))
thing which is beautiful and a small type of
girls' school
16.29) melbi cmalu je nixli jebo ckule
melbi cmalu je ke nixli je ckule [ke'e]
pretty type-of (little and (girl and school))
thing which is beautifully small, a beautiful girl,
and a beautiful school
Note: same as 16.37
16.30) melbi je cmalu jebo nixli bo ckule
melbi je ke cmalu je nixli bo ckule [ke'e]
pretty and (little and (girl type-of school))
thing which is beautiful, small and a girls' school
Note: same as 16.15
16.31) melbi je ke cmalu nixli je ckule [ke'e]
pretty and (little type-of (girl and school))
beautiful thing which is a small girl and a small school
16.32) melbi jebo cmalu jebo nixli jebo ckule
pretty and (little and (girl and school))
thing which is beautiful, small, a girl, and a school
16.33) melbi ke cmalu nixli ckule [ke'e]
pretty type-of ((little type-of girl) type-of school)
beautiful school for small girls
16.34) melbi ke cmalu je nixli ckule [ke'e]
pretty type-of ((little and girl) type-of school
beautiful school for things which are small
and are girls
16.35) melbi ke cmalu bo nixli je ckule [ke'e]
pretty type-of ((little type-of girl) and school)
beautiful thing which is a small girl and a school
16.36) melbi je ke cmalu nixli ckule [ke'e]
pretty and ((little type-of girl) type-of school)
thing which is beautiful and a school for small girls
16.37) melbi cmalu je nixli je ckule
pretty type-of ((little and girl) and school)
thing which is beautifully small, a beautiful girl,
and a beautiful school
Note: same as 16.29
16.38) melbi je ke cmalu bo nixli je ckule [ke'e]
pretty and ((little type-of girl) and school)
thing which is beautiful, a small girl and a school
Note: same as 16.22
16.39) melbi je ke cmalu je nixli ckule [ke'e]
pretty and ((little and girl) type-of school)
thing which is beautiful and is a small school
and a girls' school
16.40) melbi je ke cmalu je nixli je ckule [ke'e]
pretty and ((little and girl) and school)
thing which is beautiful, small, a girl, and a school